dcmiller wrote:
Is it a surprise that the 1DsIII has better high ISO performance than the 2005 5D? My 1DIII certainly has better high ISO performance than the 5Dv.1.
brainiac wrote:
I didn't do that. I used both cameras professionally in very low light since September '05 and December '07 respectively, and found that the 1Ds3 is at least a stop better than the 5D, and pretty much on a par with the D700. I also presented quite a few examples on this forum to show that the 1Ds3 can perform at ISO 12800 in a way that my 5D's never could. Here's an example: http://cyberphotographer.com/1ds3/vampire2_lowrez.jpg
OT, Richard. Is that Vampire Weekend? I shot them this summer also:
Daan B wrote:
I sense you are a bit disappointed by the NR of the 5D2 Richard? Still determined to sell off your 1Ds3? That D700 is looking mighty interesting, doesn't it?
You are reading my mind! I was hoping that the 5D2 would really hit Nikon (and the 1Ds3) in the nuts on this high iso issue, but it doesn't look like it will. If the 5D2 is on a par with the 1Ds3 for high iso, I might hang on to the mk3 for the AF and other goodness. There will be no clear high ISO leader then, to my mind. I love my alt glass too much to switch altogether, but a D700 with a Zeiss 35 and the built-in flash would be a perfect 2nd body (except for the mount).
brainiac wrote:
You are reading my mind! I was hoping that the 5D2 would really hit Nikon (and the 1Ds3) in the nuts on this high iso issue, but it doesn't look like it will. If the 5D2 is on a par with the 1Ds3 for high iso, I might hang on to the mk3 for the AF and other goodness. There will be no clear high ISO leader then, to my mind. I love my alt glass too much to switch altogether, but a D700 with a Zeiss 35 and the built-in flash would be a perfect 2nd body (except for the mount)....Show more →
Now you are reading my mind too... A D700 + 24-70mm looks like a perfect second body/set-up
dcmiller wrote:
Is it a surprise that the 1DsIII has better high ISO performance than the 2005 5D? My 1DIII certainly has better high ISO performance than the 5Dv.1.
It certainly is to a lot of people (most of whom have switched to Nikon). More pixels are bad, remember. That's the 100% crop at unequal magnification mantra.
Actually, I'm not sure if rain damage would be covered by warranty- as there is no way for Canon to know whether you dropped it into a lake or how much rain the camera was subjected to. In general they would recommend that you not use it in the rain, and that the sealing would not be covered under warranty. Jman13 wrote:
Ben, what are you talking about? This is not the same sealing as the 40D. Period. It's much better gasketed, with sealing on all the buttons, dials, LCD and doors. It's not a strip of foam. If Canon says it can operate in a 7 inch / hour downpour, then it can withstand that. If it can't, they'll be doing a lot of warranty repairs. Why do you insist on arguing this when your only point is "the 40D's sealing sucks."? This isn't sealed like the 40D!
Daan B wrote:
Now you are reading my mind too... A D700 + 24-70mm looks like a perfect second body/set-up
Actually, that's a good idea too - the Nikon 24-70. Perfect. I'm probably going to go and borrow that combo tonight. Lens seems a bit long though. I'll be certain to bash it.
orangefirefish wrote:
Actually, I'm not sure if rain damage would be covered by warranty- as there is no way for Canon to know whether you dropped it into a lake or how much rain the camera was subjected to. In general they would recommend that you not use it in the rain, and that the sealing would not be covered under warranty.
Indeed. Has anyone gotten Canon replace a 1-series under warranty for rain damage? I don't know of/heard of anyone who has.
Jman13 wrote:
Ben, what are you talking about? This is not the same sealing as the 40D. Period. It's much better gasketed, with sealing on all the buttons, dials, LCD and doors. It's not a strip of foam. If Canon says it can operate in a 7 inch / hour downpour, then it can withstand that. If it can't, they'll be doing a lot of warranty repairs. Why do you insist on arguing this when your only point is "the 40D's sealing sucks."? This isn't sealed like the 40D!
How do you know it's not the foam rubber like on the 40D, period? I'm going based on what I see on the 40D which is also "weather sealed," as well as the D700. The D700 has better sealing than the 40D, but it still has the fundamental weakness of having a friction opening door that does not provide much force onto the seal. Simply shifting the camera in your hand will break the "seal."
Take a look at the sealing on a 1 series, a Nikon D3, or a Pentax K20D. They all use compression sealing with a lock on the door, and a solid rubber seal.
If you take a 5DII into a heavy rain, and it suffers water damage --- I don't think Canon will be honoring the claim that the seals should have held. They will simply say that the rain level was beyond what the camera could stand, and therefore you'll have either a very expensive repair bill, or an unrepairable camera.
They can claim sealing all they want --- I'm stating that I am EXTREMELY weary of this claim that it is sealed as much as the 1 series. It just can't be possible based on the design --- especially once the door starts to get loose with time.
thedigitalbean wrote:
Indeed. Has anyone gotten Canon replace a 1-series under warranty for rain damage? I don't know of/heard of anyone who has.
In the U.S. it's basic "fitness for purpose". Once they give it a rain rating they have gave warranted it for that purpose. Now, if a fish falls out when they open the back they're not going to fix it. But if something is shorted due to moisture the burden falls to them. (and yes, I did take a business law class on this topic. thanks for asking)
You can be certain what Canon says about weather rating has gone past the lawyers.
I do know a person who had their 1 series stop working after days in damp, misty weather. They did repair it for her under warranty. 1 Series absolutely do fail in the rain. That's why there are raincoats made for 1 series cameras.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Argh, aren't you reading the thread? Some dumbo has probably transcribed across 50D specs, which why originally the Canon websites said builtin flash and EF-S lens support.
Damn, there's a bunch of pissy-ass whiners in here!
Face reality and quit being spoiled brats. Do you honestly think Canon is going to deliver you a 1Ds MKIII for the cost of the 5D Seriously. That would be a pretty stupid business practice. You guys are trying to make it sound like this is the 30D "upgrade" all over. It's simply not and, in actuality, a rather substantial upgrade. I'm sure Canon really feels as if they simply cannot make you guys happy, no matter what they do.
What you did get is amazing - the best IQ of any sensor in the world, for $2600. And it just happens to include 1080HD movie mode too... WTF do you have to whine about. Go shoot some photos already, ya losers! Sheesh!
1) Gaffers tape. $5K buys a lot of gaffers tape. Or two backup cameras.
2) I thought you were done with this subject.
Ben Horne wrote:
How do you know it's not the foam rubber like on the 40D, period? I'm going based on what I see on the 40D which is also "weather sealed," as well as the D700. The D700 has better sealing than the 40D, but it still has the fundamental weakness of having a friction opening door that does not provide much force onto the seal. Simply shifting the camera in your hand will break the "seal."
Take a look at the sealing on a 1 series, a Nikon D3, or a Pentax K20D. They all use compression sealing with a lock on the door, and a solid rubber seal.
If you take a 5DII into a heavy rain, and it suffers water damage --- I don't think Canon will be honoring the claim that the seals should have held. They will simply say that the rain level was beyond what the camera could stand, and therefore you'll have either a very expensive repair bill, or an unrepairable camera.
They can claim sealing all they want --- I'm stating that I am EXTREMELY weary of this claim that it is sealed as much as the 1 series. It just can't be possible based on the design --- especially once the door starts to get loose with time.
I agree- I just don't see how much compression the flimsy little card door or battery door could exert. The sealing is neoprene foam on the card door and battery door. I've never tested it against water, but I can't imagine it holding much out. Even if they were rubber gaskets on the 5d mk II, there's not much pressure that the door can exert on the body. The 1d series have actual rubber gaskets that line the battery, which is compressed to fit into place with the body.
Also, Canon's claim on weathersealing for the 40d was that it was "improved." Well, look at the 30d, and it's definitely an improvement, but man, that doesn't help much. Ben Horne wrote:
How do you know it's not the foam rubber like on the 40D, period? I'm going based on what I see on the 40D which is also "weather sealed," as well as the D700. The D700 has better sealing than the 40D, but it still has the fundamental weakness of having a friction opening door that does not provide much force onto the seal. Simply shifting the camera in your hand will break the "seal."
Take a look at the sealing on a 1 series, a Nikon D3, or a Pentax K20D. They all use compression sealing with a lock on the door, and a solid rubber seal.
If you take a 5DII into a heavy rain, and it suffers water damage --- I don't think Canon will be honoring the claim that the seals should have held. They will simply say that the rain level was beyond what the camera could stand, and therefore you'll have either a very expensive repair bill, or an unrepairable camera.
They can claim sealing all they want --- I'm stating that I am EXTREMELY weary of this claim that it is sealed as much as the 1 series. It just can't be possible based on the design --- especially once the door starts to get loose with time.
But how do you really feel?
And who are you yelling at?
nefarius wrote:
Damn, there's a bunch of pissy-ass whiners in here!
Face reality and quit being spoiled brats. Do you honestly think Canon is going to deliver you a 1Ds MKIII for the cost of the 5D Seriously. That would be a pretty stupid business practice. You guys are trying to make it sound like this is the 30D "upgrade" all over. It's simply not and, in actuality, a rather substantial upgrade. I'm sure Canon really feels as if they simply cannot make you guys happy, no matter what they do.
What you did get is amazing - the best IQ of any sensor in the world, for $2600. And it just happens to include 1080HD movie mode too... WTF do you have to whine about. Go shoot some photos already, ya losers! Sheesh! ...Show more →
Ben Horne wrote:
How do you know it's not the foam rubber like on the 40D, period? I'm going based on what I see on the 40D which is also "weather sealed," as well as the D700. The D700 has better sealing than the 40D, but it still has the fundamental weakness of having a friction opening door that does not provide much force onto the seal. Simply shifting the camera in your hand will break the "seal."
Take a look at the sealing on a 1 series, a Nikon D3, or a Pentax K20D. They all use compression sealing with a lock on the door, and a solid rubber seal.
If you take a 5DII into a heavy rain, and it suffers water damage --- I don't think Canon will be honoring the claim that the seals should have held. They will simply say that the rain level was beyond what the camera could stand, and therefore you'll have either a very expensive repair bill, or an unrepairable camera.
They can claim sealing all they want --- I'm stating that I am EXTREMELY weary of this claim that it is sealed as much as the 1 series. It just can't be possible based on the design --- especially once the door starts to get loose with time. ...Show more →
Because they've released diagrams showing the new seals and rubber gaskets and everything. It's so much closer to the 1D than the 40D in sealing. Be wary all you want, but don't continue to say the 5DII's sealing sucks when all the evidence points to the contrary. Canon didn't release a water rating for the 40D, and they did for the 5DII...and it's just below the 1D's rating. That's pretty darn good.
Ben's point is that it doesn't matter what Canon says, because they won't honor the claim anyhow. In reality, the door design just will not allow adequate sealing on a vital area. Jman13 wrote: Because they've released diagrams showing the new seals and rubber gaskets and everything. It's so much closer to the 1D than the 40D in sealing. Be wary all you want, but don't continue to say the 5DII's sealing sucks when all the evidence points to the contrary. Canon didn't release a water rating for the 40D, and they did for the 5DII...and it's just below the 1D's rating. That's pretty darn good.
Seriously. That would be a pretty stupid business practice. You guys are trying to make it sound like this is the 30D "upgrade" all over. It's simply not and, in actuality, a rather substantial upgrade. I'm sure Canon really feels as if they simply cannot make you guys happy, no matter what they do. 